Slashdot Mirror
New Battlestar Galactica - Worth a Series?
rwxJava asks: "Ok, so it finally aired! IMHO it was pretty good. The special effects were great (no major laws of physics were broken except maybe FTL travel), the characters, while drastically different from the original, were believable! After about an hour or so, I stopped trying to compare the mini-series with the original. My only complaint has to be the amount of commercials that Scf-Fi put in. I was able to put up a Christmas Tree during one commercial break. Guess the network needs to cash in on such a hyped up event! By the end, I was left wanting more! Anyone else think it is worthy of conversion to a series?" Now that you've have had a time to watch the entire 4-hour epic (does 4 hours really make a "mini-series"?), do you think your earlier comments were on target?
First, let me just say that John Olmos was correct: If you are so
dedicated to the original series that you cannot bring yourself to imagine
it any other way, then do yourself a favor and skip this miniseries. You
will only be disappointed, and you will nitpick it to death.
On the other hand, if you can bring yourself, however painfully, to
open your mind to the possiblity of a "re-imagining" of the Battlestar
Galactica concept, then I think you're in for a pleasant surprise.
It's not all wonderful. Screenwriter Ron Moore wanted
to bring a more grown-up Galactica to his audience, but he's apparantly
confused grown-up with gratuitious. Sex works much better when it's done
dramatically, instead of the "hey watch us get it on!" style that Moore
forces on us. He is perhaps striving to show us the sexual energy between
the characters, but really all it does is make us wonder when the low
quality porno music is going to kick in.
Otherwise, the annoyances are minor. The cylon space fighters,
apparantly just space-borne Cylons (a neat idea, really) come off kind of
hoakey with their red sweeping eyes. I know, I know, the eyes are really
some kind of electromagnetic pulse weapons, but it's distracting just the
same.
Okay, now on to what's good. First, and foremost, the story is solid.
Whereas in the original series we just had to take for granted that the
Cylons were the embodiment of evil, now we understand why.
The characters is also solid. Again, you'll have to get over
your preconceptions of the original series characters, and at least try
to buy in to the new ones. The hardest pill for me to swallow were the
gender changes of Starbuck and Boomer. But I actually found myself liking
the new Starbuck, although the Boomer role could have been a bit stronger.
The special effects were incredible, and proved that you really can
make space realistic, and exciting. In fact, the "no sound in space"
approach actually heightened the tension, and proved that you don't have
to dumb-down physics for the masses. Also, having the space ships use
maneuvering jets created even more exciting scenes than the normal Top Gun
stuff we're used to.
Is it worth a series? I think so. With a solid backstory, believable
characters, and an approach that doesn't assume the audience are stupid,
it could quite very set the bar for future Sci Fi.
Did they have sound in space as the ships flew by? That has always been one of my major pet peeves. At least Kubrick got it right in 2001.
Trolling is a art,
1) Sounds in space. Space ships could be heard
making "thrusting" and "crashing" noises.
2) Continual stream of stars zoom past windows
to convey forward momentum (as opposed to say,
rotation or banking). Perhaps they were
trying to reproduce one of the things I hated
in the original series.
3) Lovely handheld-style (jerky) camera moves
from space. I actually liked this (think they
did it in Firefly too), but how do you get the
cameraman from "Law and Order" into a spacesuit?
That was the major question I though they did not seem to answer, or at least even touch.
I could understand a different species not liking us, and in some way, being what we might call pure evil. Hey, they're different. Species are different. Intelligence does not mean that we all get along.
But in this case, the cylons are now our computers run amok. OK, while I can deal with this change, they never then touched on why they want to kill us? Because we wanted to kill them? Why do they want to kill us now? What does it benefit them? What computational values make them _want_ to expend the resources, et al to go to war with us? They just glanced that one over, and in the end, said, hey, the cylons want to kill us, so there.
...tizzyd
...Cow. Wonderful wonderful series. Usually I roll my eyes at the "tough girl" type of lead character, but Ms. thingy managed to convince me. She threw punches like she knew what she was doing, and was sensitive enough to be believable, yet tough and uncaring enough to root for.
The tension between Father and Son was believable. The only thing I didn't like was the new "president" ordering a military ship to turn around. That was SO not believable. Had I been in charge, she would have "accidently" found the way to the nearest airlock....
It was hinted at. I think what it boils down to is that they got religion. I'm serious. 6 makes refers to her "God" early on and the other Cylon they found in the arms depot goes on to talk about what if God had stopped giving souls to humans and started giving them to other more worthy creatures. An excellent direction if you ask me, it allows all sorts of bizzare and seemingly illrational behavior for a group of robots.
*Fortitudo, aequitas, fidelitas.*
In that regard, the 'Wing Commander' games and movie were better, in that the mass driver cannon were one of the most effective weapons if you could hit with them -- but they sucked energy to run. However, in Battlestar Galactica, it appeared that for small-craft weapons you pretty much had a choice between missiles and some kind of plasma-in-a-magnetic-bottle weapon. For missiles, a kinetic-kill system is kind of pointless -- even air-to-air missiles today don't rely on the missile itself actually hitting its target -- so a high-explosive or small nuke warhead is what you'd expect to see.
I expect that we're never going to get told why neither side uses kinetic-kill systems for the fighters' primary weapons, although I would guess that an energy weapon will have a point at which the 'projectile' dissipates; a kinetic-kill weapon in space would keep going, producing widely-ranging hazard zones from old battles.
I've seen a lot of what made DS9 the best Trek ever in Galactica: shades of grey. While Picard was lily-white, Sisko engaged in back-stabbing, brutality and (otherwise unknown in Star Trek) self-doubt. Anyhow, this argument has been well-hashed out here and elsewhere about Trek.
.01%, and yet we're still treated to light-hearted B.S. with Boxey and that loveable rogue (ugh) Starbuck. The new Galactica shows people how they would really be: frightened, depressed, and desperate.
What puzzles me watching the new Galactica is how I ever accepted the delivery of the premise of the old series. I mean, the premise lays out 99.99% of the human race has just been brutally slaughtered, and things don't look good for the remaining
Furthermore, as much as I loved John Colicos, the new characterization of Baltar is far more complex. Baltar seems to be a right-bastard, but one who realizes that he is and wishes (vainly) that he was not. Resigned to his nature, he's looking to cut the best deal he can.
They'll undoubtedly lose Mary McDonald before the end of the mini. This show kicks the crap out of anything else sci-fi has; I dearly hope that they chill on the pointless sex scenes, relax on the zoom-focus fx shots, and make this a damn series.
If your bitterest enemies are people who hack the heads off civilians, then I would say you're doing something right.
One thing that really stood out for me were the costumes and sets. I'm so tired of sci-fi costume and set designers making all costumes out of woven mylar or whatever shiny fabric. Then they make these elaborate CGI cities with spiraling towers and wispy skyways. Honestly, who really believes the future is like that? DS9 tried to break that mold, but failed as miserably as most other sci-fi. The station was supposed to be a seedy marketplace, but instead everyone ended up wearing the same style freshly-laundered jumpsuit but in slightly different colors, maybe with a sash or a hat or something.
BG actually had believable costumes. The characters looked like they were wearing regular comfortable every-day clothes, but there were enough subtle design changes to make it clear that they weren't on Any Street USA. The buildings just looked like regular buildings. It just helped add to the overall experience and I wanted to give a nod to those designers who finally Got It Right.
"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
The original Battlestar Galactica had landing bays in its two long "legs." This was very strategic, as the Cylons would sometimes crash into the bays in order to temporarily prevent the fighters from landing. The new Battlestar Galactica also has landing bays in its "legs", BUT they are now open on both ends. Conceivably a fighter could now land by approaching the ship from either direction.
Why watch it? I intentionally didn't watch it Monday and Tuesday because I had my doubts and knew they'd replay it a dozen times (like they did with Taken). And why would I watch it Sunday now that many people here on Slashdot have confirmed those doubts?
The religion is presented differently in the new version, but you'll have to wait until the end for most of that (or just flip to SciFi at around 10:30pm on Sunday if you want to skip all the character development, battle scenes, moral dilemmas, and sex scenes).
The sad part is that I'd have to wait so late in the program to actually get something I'd want to watch.
It really seems to me that this new Battlestar Galactica is to the Battlestar Galactica franchise what Episodes I and II (and probably III) are to the Star Wars franchise. But at least the new Star Wars crud doesn't act like the real Star Wars trilogy never existed.
I would have been far more interested in watching this new version of Battlestar Galactica if it happened, well, say 25 years later than the real Battlestar Galactica? Apollo and Starbuck could be older men--perhaps the original Apollo (Richard Hatch) would now be fleet commander since Adama (and Lorne Greene) are both dead, and maybe Starbuck would now hold Colonel Ti's position. And you could introduce a whole new line of warriors, plots, special effects, twists, etc. That would have been GREAT. You get a tie-in to the real Battlestar Galactica, don't alienate the original fans, and still can do your new stuff with young, new actors.
But to just pretend the real Battlestar Galactica never happened and just do a complete re-do is absurd. People grudgingly tolerate Episode I and II and III... But what if George Lucas then said, "Well, we're going to redo Star Wars, Empire, and ROTJ using the actors we've groomed in I, II, and III. No more Harrison Ford playing Han Solo, now Han Solo is going to be played by Jennifer Lopez. Oh yeah, by the way, Han Solo is now a hot lady." That's basically what we're talking about here with the new Battlestar Galactica.
They did a re-do when a continuation would have been much, much better. Unfortunately, if the new BSG did/does well then they'll probably want to launch a series based on the new BSG. If it does poorly they'll probably think "Well it was cancelled after one season in the 70's and didn't do well in 2003, so I guess it's just a failure." Either way we won't get to see a continuation of the real Battlestar Galactica. :(